1 2025:CGHC:24671 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 858 of 2025 1 - Sagar Vaishnav S/o. Kush Kumar Vaishnav Aged About 38 Years R/o. Khandelwal Colony, Vaishali Nagar, Rajnandgaon, Permanent R/o. Village - Khamhera, Out Post - Tumdibod, Tehsil - Dongargaon, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh. Through Sho, Police Station - Kotwali, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Samir Singh, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Jitendra Shirwastava, Government Advocate Hon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 16/06/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of Anticipatory Bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.108/2025, registered at Police Station – Kotwali District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111, 3(5) of BNS. VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.06.20 13:18:52 +0530 2 2. As per the prosecution story, on 06.05.2025 written report submitted by Cyber cell in charge Vinod Kumar is that as per such mule bank account obtained from cyber fraud was done and four bank accounts located in Rajnandgaon District, in which total Rs. 11,58,281 was deposited and present applicant's bank account is also used. Ultimately, F.I.R. was lodged by the complainant. On basis of above facts, an offence has been registered against the applicant/accused under section 317 (2), 317 (4), 317 (5), 111, 3 (5) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that applicant had merely provided details of this account on the request of his friend namely Shivraj Dwivedi and only 1,05,000/- had come into his account, this amount was neither used nor withdrawn by the applicant. He also submits that there is no material against the applicant in the entire case diary except the memorandum statement of the co-accused. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that applicant has no criminal antecedent but looking to the overt-act applicant is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of dispute and material available in the case diary, it transpires that the present case is of the nature of online fraud, by which the complainants suffered loss of huge amount, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant– Sagaar Vaishnav filed under Section 482 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 involved in Crime No.108/2025, registered at Police Station – Kotwali District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111, 3(5) of BNS rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali